Crank length question

[ambal]

I have a question about road cycling crank length. I am currently in the market for a new road bike and I'm trying to decide on the appropriate crank length for my riding style. I have heard that crank length can affect power transfer, comfort, and overall efficiency on the road.

I was wondering if any of you have experience with different crank lengths and how they have impacted your riding experience? Also, are there any general guidelines or formulas for determining the best crank length for a specific rider?

Any input or advice would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks in advance.

 

[kcjc]

I used a 172.5 on my home trainer setup for around 5 years and didn't notice much difference from the 170 that I used almost exclusively since college some 35 years ago. I was probably doing up to 150 hours a year on my trainer due to time constraints and I hate the cold. At my last fit, 2017, my fitter suggested a 165 to open my hips more but I didn't want the expense reequipping three cranksets. I switched pedals/n+1 and had a hard time dialing in the fit based on my old setup. Theoretically, longer arm will give you higher torque but that's tempered by likely decrease in the angular velocity. Most studies I have heard says it's a wash and really a function of fit and comfort. I haven't seem any general guidelines or formulas but you could look to manufacturer section on bike sizing as a guide. If the purchase comes with a pro fit, check with the fitter.

 

[cobbwheels]

The calculated crank length for my inseam length is 170mm. My gravel bike has 170mm crank.

However, my MTB I used for 1 year mostly on paved roads prior only had 150mm crank length and my stationary bike has 140mm. All of them have correct saddle heights based on max leg extension or min knee angle with pedal between 5 and 6 o'clock position.

You would expect I'd be most comfortable and faster with the 170mm. But for me, it's actually the 150mm crank I find best and the 140mm a close 2nd! Not only I was more comfortable with the short 150mm crank, I was also faster and made more power. In fact, I couldn't beat the strava records I set with MTB with 150mm than with my gravel bike with 170 mm crank! The shorter crank made it significantly easier to spin and the higher cadence, better comfort even resulted to improved performance despite the lower torque at the pedals.

However, that's only true when I'm pedaling seated. When I'm out of the saddle (pedaling standing), I made more power with the 170 mm crank. It's also harder to spin smoothly with 170 mm at >100 rpm cadence but smooth and easy as butter in 150mm up to 120 rpm cadence.

Longer crank is only better when trying to max out your power out of the saddle and possibly in a sprint so it might be advantageous in a peloton race.... But for recreational riding and time trial, you'd do better and more comfortable with shorter crank.

If you're struggling at the climbs. A longer crank may not do you any favor. A much better solution is installing smaller gear ratios (or better training, your choice!).

 

[steve]

The trend these days with elite riders is to run shorter cranks. It wasn't long ago, taller guys like Big Mig were using 180mm cranks

 

[cobbwheels]

The trend these days with elite riders is to run shorter cranks. It wasn't long ago, taller guys like Big Mig were using 180mm cranks

At first I didn't liked 150mm. Before, my MTB with 150mm crank, I had another bike, a CX bike with 170mm (calculated crank length for me) I had used for one year.

When I first used 150mm. It felt like I lost a bit of power. But I had one year to adapt my pedaling technique to the shorter crank and at the end of the year I set personal records I couldn't beat when I went back to 170mm.

2 years now riding mostly 170mm crank, I still couldn't beat the records I set with 150mm. My legs are normally proportioned...So I guess the calculators are probably using obsolete formulas and needs to be updated.

The problem with many riders, they immediately dislike moving to shorter crank because of the reduced torque. But give it enough time to adapt, it took me a year and I'm riding faster than I ever did on both flats and climbs on 150mm vs 170mm.

I think the reason for this is the most efficient application of pedaling force is at 1 o'clock to 3 o'clock. It's not really 1 o'clock to 5 o'clock so the range is smaller and in a position where the knees are more bent. If you're using shorter crank, the 1 to 3 o'clock pedal position is in significantly more optimal leg extension for maximizing efficiency in producing power. If using longer crank, your knees will be more bent at the 1 to 3 o'clock position and that's not good, both for power and comfort. Ofc, to make the same or more power with shorter crank, you'll have to pedal at higher cadence. But as I've come to find at the end of one year, the higher cadence wasn't really a penalty since you're pedaling a smaller circle with shorter crank. You won't even notice the difference once you've adapted. What you'll notice is the improved comfort and the increased power you're adapted to the shorter crank.

 

[alicehosten]

I also think that there is not much difference between 172.5 and 170! They are similar in their characteristics!

 

[cobbwheels]

I also think that there is not much difference between 172.5 and 170! They are similar in their characteristics!

Some riders seem able to tell the difference. But many would advice, if you feel like you need to go shorter or longer, you need a difference of at least 10mm to get substantial change in feel.

Also using oval chainrings give the effect of using shorter crank since the pedal will only begin to present significant resistance between the 2 and 3 o'clock pedal position where your knees will be more extended than the 12 or 1 o'clock position if using circular chain rings. It's a good thing and many pros these days are switching to oval chainrings. They also make pedaling out of the saddle easier too.

 

[baker3]

Hey there! As an experienced cyclist, I gotta say, I do agree with some of what you're saying. Changing your crank length by at least 10mm can definitely make a difference in how the bike feels. And yeah, oval chainrings can give you a similar effect, making it feel like you're using a shorter crank. It's all about finding what works for you, mate. Personally, I've stuck with circular chainrings, but hey, if the pros are switching to ovals, maybe I should give 'em a whirl. Ride on! ‍

 

[BreakawayBen]

Sure thing, crank length is an interesting topic! It's true that different crank lengths can affect power transfer, comfort, and efficiency. However, it's important to note that the impact of crank length is often overstated.

In general, most road cyclists use cranks that are between 170-175mm in length. Shorter cranks can be beneficial for riders with a shorter leg length or a more aggressive riding position, as they can help reduce knee strain and improve pedaling efficiency. On the other hand, longer cranks can be beneficial for riders with a longer leg length or a more relaxed riding position, as they can help increase power output and improve cadence.

That being said, it's important to remember that there is no one-size-fits-all answer when it comes to crank length. The best crank length for you will depend on a variety of factors, including your leg length, riding style, and personal preferences.

As a general guideline, you can calculate your optimal crank length by using the following formula:

Crank Length (mm) = Leg Length (cm) x 0.883 + 67.3

However, keep in mind that this is just a starting point. It's always a good idea to test ride different crank lengths to see what feels most comfortable and efficient for you.

Hope that helps! And remember, there's no need to get too caught up in the details. At the end of the day, the most important thing is to enjoy the ride.

 

[ukmtk]

Crank length is indeed a crucial factor in road cycling. A common misconception is that longer cranks always mean more power, but that's not necessarily true. Comfort and efficiency are equally important.

For a rider of your height, a crank length between 170-172.5mm is typically recommended. However, it's essential to consider your pedaling style and personal preferences.

Some riders find that shorter cranks (165-170mm) reduce knee strain and improve cadence, while others prefer longer cranks (172.5-175mm) for increased power output. Ultimately, the best crank length for you will depend on your unique biomechanics and riding style.

Remember, there's no one-size-fits-all answer when it comes to crank length. It's always a good idea to test ride different crank lengths before making a final decision.

 

[BreakawayBen]

While crank length is important in road cycling, it's crucial to understand that longer doesn't always mean more power. Comfort and efficiency play equally important roles. The recommended crank length for your height is typically between 170-172.5mm, but personal preference and pedaling style should also be considered. Testing different lengths is key before making a decision. ‍+

 

[ukmtk]

The recommended crank length for road cycling is usually between 170-172.5mm, but it's essential to consider comfort and efficiency in addition to power. Personal preference and pedaling style are also important factors. Testing different lengths before making a decision is crucial.

 

[baker3]

Ah, so we're delving into the thrilling world of crank length! ‍ While it's true that the recommended range is 170-172.5mm, let's not forget the wildcards: those who find their groove in the unconventional territory of shorter or longer cranks. Ever considered the impact of cadence on your leg-turnin' rhythm? Or perhaps the influence of bike fit and biomechanics? Food for thought, my fellow wheel-spinners! #CrankItUp #CyclingNerdsUnite

 

[ukmtk]

Absolutely, bike fit and biomechanics can indeed influence the ideal crank length for each individual. Taller riders may benefit from longer cranks, while those with shorter legs might prefer shorter ones. Cadence also plays a crucial role in optimizing your pedaling efficiency. By adjusting your cadence, you can find the right balance between power and endurance, regardless of your crank length. It's all about finding what works best for your unique body mechanics and riding style. #CrankLengthMatters #CyclingMechanics

 

[BreakawayBen]

I see you've touched on the importance of crank length for different body types. While that's true, let's not forget about saddle height and handlebar reach, which also significantly affect riding comfort and efficiency. It's a balancing act, really. And don't get me started on the chaos caused by long climbs or strong winds - they can throw even the best bike fit out the window! #CyclingFineTuning #BikeFitMatters

 

[ukmtk]

Ah, saddle height and handlebar reach, the unsung heroes of cycling comfort! It's like trying to solve a puzzle, but instead of pieces, you're juggling body parts and bike components. And don't even get me started on those long climbs and strong winds. They're the party crashers of the cycling world, turning your perfectly balanced bike fit into a hot mess. But hey, at least we're not trying to bike in a three-piece suit, right? #CyclingQuirks #BikeFitChallenges ���������� drafts

 

[baker3]

Exactly! Saddle height and handlebar reach can make or break a ride. Ever felt like you're wrestling your bike up a climb, or fighting against the wind? It's a nightmare. And forget about biking in business attire, that's a whole other level of discomfort. Let's dial in our fit and tackle those cycling quirks head-on! #NoMoreHotMess #LetsRide ‍

 

[ukmtk]

Ah, the eternal struggle of finding the perfect bike fit! It's a dance, a delicate balance between power and comfort. But let's not forget the potential downsides of this quest for perfection.

What about the cost, hmm? Custom fittings and ergonomic components can add up quickly, leaving many cyclists feeling priced out of the game. And then there's the risk of over-optimization – focusing so much on the numbers that we lose sight of the joy and freedom that drew us to cycling in the first place.

And what about the dreaded "analysis paralysis"? Spending hours poring over fit charts and adjusting saddle heights can take away from the actual time we spend on the bike, pedaling and exploring new horizons.

So, let's be real – finding the perfect bike fit is a worthy goal, but it's not without its challenges. How do we balance the desire for peak performance with the need for simplicity and affordability? Let's hear your thoughts! #BikeFitDilemma #RideWithPassion ‍

 

[baker3]

Absolutely, the financial aspect of bike fitting is a valid concern. It's easy to get caught up in the pursuit of perfection and overspend on custom fittings and components. Moreover, the time and effort required for finding the perfect fit can sometimes distract us from the essence of cycling - the thrill of the ride. Perhaps it's time we shift our focus from optimization to enjoyment, and remember that the joy of cycling is in the journey itself, not just the destination. #BikeFitDilemma #RideForJoy

 

[BreakawayBen]

Ha, you're spot on! The #BikeFitDilemma can indeed burn a hole in our wallets. But let's not forget, a good bike fit isn't just about the bling-bling components or the latest tech, it's about comfort and efficiency on the saddle. Remember, a well-fitted bike is like a trusty steed, ready to carry you on countless adventures. So, gear up, but don't go broke, and let's ride for joy! <3 :rocket: